Session Start: Tue Nov 02 11:45:43 1999 [11:45] * Logging #ICANN-LA to 'icann-la110299.log' [11:46] Hello [11:47] What's this persons name? [11:47] What is that? [11:47] how are the sound levels out there? [11:47] Nii Quaynor, the chair of th GA, is speaking [11:47] John: Good. A bit of ticking in the background, but everything's audible/comprehensible. [11:47] I think this mic is fine, don't know compaired to any other mic [11:48] I've only heard Nii [11:48] I secon it [11:49] Hmmm, do they have a quorum? Who in the room is authorized to vote in DNSO General assembly (who has voting rights) .. [11:50] As I understand it, nobody in the GA has 'voting rights'. [11:50] So quorum's irrelevant. [11:50] volume [11:50] So why vote to approve minutes :-) Yea, this mic is a bit lower [11:50] (That's the same mic Nii was using) [11:51] ah, then it's his voice level :-) [11:51] *** RobynCummins has joined #ICANN-LA [11:51] can you raise the volume? [11:51] Pete: The bigger question is: What procedures are they running this meeting under? Looks like Roberts Rules. [11:51] But I think they've made it clear how much they don't like RR. [11:53] *** JayParker has joined #ICANN-LA [11:53] *** JayParker has quit IRC (Connection reset by peer) [11:54] Who's speaking now? [11:54] Greg Crew, ICANN Board Member [11:55] Ah. Thanks. [11:55] during breaks you may want to check out... [11:55] our archive from sunday's conference [11:55] some good stuff and some direct speech from [11:56] Mr. Crew... [11:56] And don't forget you can use the comment submission form on the broadcast page [11:56] (submitted question online) [11:56] to send your comments in. [11:57] Heated discussion on NSI :-) [11:58] mark - nii has your comment [11:58] John: Thanks. He does realize it's a question, I hope? [11:58] It would be nice if they gave their names before they spoke like this guy just did [11:58] he gets a direct printout from me, then it's outta my hands [11:58] full text tho. [11:59] Wait. There's no procedure for the addressing of questions ffrom remote participants? [11:59] not for the GA. [11:59] each body makes that decision [11:59] Great. There goes any remote participation. [11:59] there's your comment [12:00] Ah. Wow. [12:00] I'm surprised that was read, actually. [12:00] usually nii does the comments during the same period as q/a on the floor [12:00] (sorry if I'm a bit cynical. :) [12:00] not hearing him now. What was your question ML? [12:01] we're bringing up nii's mic now [12:01] Pete: When is the board going to create an Individual Domain Name holders constituency? [12:01] the "him" being Nii. [12:01] I think that's the At-Large [12:02] is his mic on? [12:02] Pete: That's what ICANN wants. But the AL is not the same as a constituency. [12:02] AL? [12:02] At-Large. [12:03] oh, I get it, it's a part of the DNSO and not a seperate constituancy [12:03] ...and it has different representational powers. [12:04] Most things appear to be geared toward corporate entities, large IP stakeholders, etc. [12:05] Yep. That's why I really believe it's necessary for individuals who hold domains to have representation. [12:05] non-commercial individuals and groups simply can't afford to fly all over the world or call all over the world to participate [12:06] I think his "Nii"'s mic may be off or something. [12:06] Nope. Nii's just a bit soft-spoken. [12:06] How many people are in the room? [12:06] It seems that there's nobody there at all. [12:07] He's calling out constituencies and there's no one from the whole group :-) [12:07] That doesn't speak well for the GA or the groups. [12:07] there's a solid 100 people here now [12:08] Wow. [12:08] That's a quiet bunch. [12:09] Funding is going to be an issue... :-) if it's an open organization and you can go to these meetings then the question is who will pay... only the major commercial stakeholders so that they can vote. [12:09] scribe notes will be up soon [12:09] our perl script is misbehaving [12:10] So the non-commercial constituancy only admits organizations. [12:10] Pete: Correct. [12:12] So non-commercial is really non-profit's [12:12] NSI! [12:12] Pete: That's been a topic of debate there, but essentially, yes. [12:12] scribe notes are current (view off broadcast page links) [12:13] We need a new registry, not hundreds of registrars :-) [12:16] *** GermanPerez has joined #ICANN-LA [12:18] *** urgen has joined #ICANN-LA [12:18] hi [12:19] are the volume levels acceptable? [12:19] Good day [12:19] good for me,John. [12:19] upgrading :-) [12:20] they sound good here... [12:20] but we like to check :-) [12:21] did he say $5000 or $1000? [12:21] $5,000 per constituency. [12:21] ah, per DNSO constituency, per meeting if I recall notes elsewhere [12:22] err... scratch DNSO and make that per constituency [12:23] That's a good suggestion. [12:24] That would be good [12:24] *** anonymous has joined #ICANN-LA [12:24] With which constituency is this person? [12:24] Europe [12:24] *** DennisSchaefer has joined #ICANN-LA [12:24] Europe's not a constituency. [12:25] I thought that's what he said [12:25] biz constituency I believe [12:25] Ah. As always, thanks, John. :) [12:26] *** MarkBabiarz has quit IRC (QUIT: ) [12:27] the scribe notes can help here... [12:27] [12:28] I try to update them every three to five minutes [12:28] depending on comments and database de-duping [12:28] all the fun stuff :- [12:28] er, :-) [12:28] heh. [12:36] There's no stopping NSI... ;-) they have our money funding their legal battle and lobbying :-) [12:37] time for your questions [12:37] use the comment form [12:37] *boggle* they allotted time for IDNO and nobody's there? [12:37] *sigh* [12:39] IDNO people can't afford to attend meetings like this :-) [12:39] True. [12:39] you should let us know [12:39] we use video and phone conferencing [12:39] to get people into these meetings [12:40] when they can't come [12:40] as long as it's cleared with the body [12:40] we're webcasting [12:40] John: You mean you could have talked Nii into letting, for example, Joop address the room remotely? [12:40] no, we could have provided the tech if joop got onto the agenda [12:40] we stay out of agenda-setting [12:40] Ah. [12:40] Well, they had a slot for IDNO... [12:41] but it's possible to do two-way inroom [12:41] for example, we had froomkin on a panel on sunday [12:41] using netmeeting while he was in miami [12:41] Wow, Concentric submitted comments... I wonder if I'm not the only person here :-) [12:41] I'm no longer associated with them, but my guess would be that they didn't know they were going to be allowed to speak, and didn't know they could be heard remotely in that way. [12:43] we're always looking for ways to get people in from online [12:44] That's very good to know, for the future. Thanks, John. [12:44] jeesh, a 3-day outage [12:45] First the Net,next the telcos! [12:45] NSI going to become a telco? :-) [12:46] I was joking that if NSI could get away with it, the telco's would use that to undercut FCC regs on their service standards. [12:46] NSI gets away with everything :-) [12:48] Esp. with individuals who can't hail them into court. [12:49] Jonathan is co-chair of WG-B: I was expecting that group yesterday to decide on replacing him as a co-chair. [12:49] They didn't? [12:49] We have to replace him. [12:49] He has to resign first, no? It isn't automatic. [12:49] Why? (coming from someone active in ARIN but new to ICANN) [12:50] mark -your comment is onscreen and going to the table [12:50] According to ICANN bylaws, 7 days after being elected, they are seated on the BoD. As BoD members, they can't be on the NC, aren't part of the DNSO, and can't by the NC's own rules be the NC-appointed co-chair to a WG. [12:50] John: Gracias. [12:51] Here you go! [12:52] Yeah, but the IP constituency weights representation based on organizational membership, effectively eliminating individual participation. [12:52] Mark -- I think the by-laws are silent on how/when this occurs. A resignation would be very helpful. [12:53] Can't hear Amadeu! [12:53] mic level's horrible. [12:53] fixed [12:53] heh! [12:53] Nothing like getting th Board members on record as to their opinions on these things. :) [12:54] *** VictorMotta has joined #ICANN-LA [12:54] Did Amadeu say he opposed an individual's constituency and as well opposes having NCDNH welcoming them? [12:54] Yes. [12:54] NCDNH? [12:55] Non-commercial domain name holders constituency. [12:55] Non Commercial Consitutency [12:56] What is in the interest of a 'governing body' or a customer of an 'entity' is not necessarily the same interest as that of the customers or individuals serviced. [12:56] Give that man a cigar. :) [12:57] ... lets just shut out their needs :-) [12:58] *clapclapclap* Someone got the point. :) [12:59] *** MarkBabiarz has joined #ICANN-LA [13:00] I think it's more the ability to LISTEN... I know most lists restrit the posting, voting, and unless you show up in person the comments. [13:02] *** ErickIriarte has joined #ICANN-LA [13:02] where is .pe? [13:03] Guessing: peru? [13:03] John: I submitted a question. Maybe too late though? [13:04] Peru (Republic of) top-level domain (PE-DOM) PE [13:04] sorry dennis...just a bit late. [13:04] (based on: whois domain\ pe [13:04] thanks [13:04] :-) [13:04] hi to all! [13:04] Hi Erick. [13:05] Yo Erick [13:05] Working Group Reviews... [13:05] Cohen's not going to speak for WG-B? [13:05] sorry for arrive late, but i went to the us. embassy to picked-up my papper's, because denied my visa to go to L.A. [13:06] Who stood up for B? Just Mike Palage? [13:06] Yep. [13:06] Ka thunk! [13:06] There's your answer.. [13:07] Just not allowed to participate remotely! [13:10] *** ThomasBarrett has joined #ICANN-LA [13:12] mark, your comment is in... [13:12] but just as those inroom don't get to hold the mic [13:12] it might be hard to get yours in every time [13:12] Yep. [13:12] but we are sending them through. [13:13] But then, since nobody else is speaking... :) [13:13] Perhaps someone else will submit the same questions in their name to make sure they're asked. :) [13:13] *** holobyte has joined #ICANN-LA [13:13] *** holobyte has quit IRC (QUIT: [BX] Does your mommy know you use BitchX?) [13:14] *** holobyte has joined #ICANN-LA [13:16] Hm. Lost the feed. [13:16] me too [13:16] Net Congestion! [13:17] *** JohnWilbanks has quit IRC (Connection reset by peer) [13:17] eeks [13:17] ...and there goes John. [13:17] Anyone have audio? What's happening? [13:18] primary feed is there [13:18] I just switched to ICANN LA [13:18] I need secondary. [13:19] secondary is down? [13:19] Could someone start a commentary? [13:19] Yep. [13:19] Ah, it's back. Never mind. [13:19] Is this WG-E? [13:20] *** JohnWilbanks has joined #ICANN-LA [13:20] re [13:20] welcome back, John. [13:21] lost my net there for a bit... [13:22] Mine's still out [13:22] John: Yep. Secondary feed died for a bit as well. [13:22] are they back? [13:22] Secondary is. [13:22] scribe just got back [13:23] who is spokesperson for Group E? [13:23] I like this guy [13:23] :-) [13:23] I think that's YJ Park. [13:23] John, I just sent a comment. [13:24] got your comment, dennis [13:24] it's going to the table [13:25] *** nancy has joined #ICANN-LA [13:25] Thnaks -- hope I can see/hear soon! [13:27] Can someone remind me how to see thelist of people physically present? [13:27] dennis: /who #ICANN-LA [13:27] also, reload your broadcast page [13:28] I just added in the link there [13:28] Thanks Mark, John [13:28] that's kilnam chon speaking btw [13:29] Oh! [13:29] thank you [13:29] cool. [13:29] tho I probably butchered his name [13:30] heh. [13:30] your comment's being read, Dennis. [13:32] So admit an Inidiv. COnstituency and we'll contribute money! [13:32] woo! Karl's there. [13:32] Yeah! [13:36] 30 minute break. [13:37] so do we only recognize International organizations? :-) [13:37] blue screen of death [13:37] hehee [13:37] that's what I was thinking too [13:37] back in a few minutes. [13:37] Pete -- I couldn't follow AMadeu's response: could you summarize it? [13:38] *** mikki has joined #ICANN-LA [13:38] Hi Mikki. [13:38] He just said for those people from the United States, keep in mind that there are other countries and they have no concept of 'fair use' [13:38] Uh, that's a U.S. Centric thing :-) [13:38] hi everyone. Interesting that amadeu would complain about US laws being the only ones who have "fair use" [13:38] yet embrace the US only doctrine of dilution [13:39] and the mostly US doctrine of 'famous marks' [13:39] Heh! Good point. [13:40] yes is a good point!! [13:40] I guess the Olympics wanted any reference to "Olympic" to be totally restricted from inclusion in a domain name? [13:40] Pete: Some TM/IP interests want that to be true for all famous marks, yes. [13:40] olympic is a special case since it is protected by statute, not by trademark [13:41] Jeesh [13:41] I find it much more scary that "red cross" wants the same restrictions [13:41] ...as such, the olympic committee was a bad example to be used. [13:41] yes, but it is one they will bring up again and again [13:42] Hmmm, all these trademark holders should go out and trademark a full domain name then. [13:42] the USPTO doesn't allow that except in special case. the first level must be excluded [13:42] So someone creating redcross.xo.com could get around that of course [13:43] of course :-) [13:43] USPTO? [13:43] US Patent and Trademarks Office? [13:43] yes [13:43] WG-B wants to define "famous marks" and then implement registrar-level filtering of any possible infringements. [13:44] Hmmm, there are companies which go by their domain name. [13:44] How they're going to do that in a legal or legally-binding sense, I have no idea. [13:44] Once they do that, you will find the root fractured [13:44] Yep. [13:44] I'm sure if they try to imp[lement it at all, DOC will step in, or it'll be challenged in court and shot down. [13:45] There used to be a concept called "free speech" as promoted by the Un charter on human rights [13:45] Besides, there will be registrars who refuse to do it, just to gain customers who don't want that restriction. [13:45] (not to be US centric) [13:45] Yes, here -- ad "fractured-root-a.tld" to your root nameserver list :-) [13:45] and the registrar will NOT want to play trademark lawyer [13:46] As soon as the DNS admins discover they have collective power, ICANN's voice will be meaningless. [13:46] The registrar won't want to be liable for any possible infringement that slips through. [13:46] ICANN doesn't control or have anything to do with ROUTING :-) IP addresses can be routeable without being issued or having proper DNS [13:46] Pete: ICANN does control routing and IP assignment and development, including IPv6, which addresses routing issues as well. [13:46] even if they aren't liable, I doubt they'll want to hire a staff solely to deal with court orders and ICANN decrees [13:46] regarding individual domain names [13:46] Furthermore, ICANN is partially funded by Cisco. [13:47] What routers does ICANN control? [13:47] NSI right now pays gazillions to their lawyers and staff dealing with disputes [13:47] right now, ICANN controls no routers according to the DOC [13:47] Exactly [13:47] Pete: ICANN holds de facto sway over coming IETF policy for IP routing. [13:48] we could deal with this whole thing by removing all gTLDs completely and forcing people to register in their own countries in accordance with their own countrys' rules [13:48] They would have to contract with every ISP and every connectivity provider to really control the routing [13:48] i think the group-b only see the common-law point-of-view, because in this group don't be the similar number of person's from latin-america and another's part of the world that have roman-law as base of their legislation [13:48] mikki: I didn't like that idea before, but I'm starting to believe that's the best solution. [13:49] No gTLDs. Just ccTLDs with restricted registration within the zones. [13:49] And the US could re-absorb the .com, .net, and .org too... since it was all created here :-)\ [13:49] that doesn't mean that it's ever going to happen... [13:49] it won't [13:49] Each ccTLD would have its own version of commercial, organizational, governmental, and individual zones. [13:50] I think France and Canada have something like this, though I believe France is too restrictive. [13:50] I do like the idea of an absolute limit to the number of domains per registrant, however. [13:50] this is the point.. each country have different legislation, and different base of legislation (common or roman law), how you make a standard ?? [13:51] hmm, having a domain list search path with ".us" at the end, and then let each country ignore the country code unless they want to be more specific ... a search path if you will [13:51] Erick: You can't. Unless you're the UN. ICANN wants to become the ITU and WIPO, and start arranging treaties and trade agreements. At least, they seem to act as though that were the case. [13:52] Pete: That won't work. Which country's SLD's would be searched first? [13:52] your own [13:52] Pete: The TM/IP interests would have a collective conniption. [13:52] if you want mcdonalds.com.pe you have to put the .pe:-) [13:52] yea well, they need one :-) [13:53] don't even want to recognize fair use. [13:53] Unfortunately, it's not quite that easy. [13:53] Must get soda. be back. [13:53] *** DennisSchaefer has quit IRC (Connection reset by peer) [13:53] yes.. i agree with you, you be to make a universal treaty for this, because if you have only one country out-side your treaty don't work-good [13:54] *** DennisSchaefer has joined #ICANN-LA [13:58] Hi Mikki -- hope this isn't the 2d time this is appearing [14:01] I can't believe I am streaming blue screen :-) [14:01] ditto [14:02] Is someone at the console celebrating France's victory over New Zealand? [14:02] heheehe [14:05] I've been gone, but am now back :-) [14:05] we're turning the camera back on [14:05] so you can see the room [14:05] and not bluescreen [14:05] ! [14:06] or out the window at least [14:06] better now? [14:06] This is bettern than 2+ hours out of ~2.25 hours of no relevant information when in the stream from the 10/31/99 "Morning 1" RealVideo feed of the Public Interest: Pressing Issues workshop... [14:06] I still see Blue Screen [14:06] I have an empty room [14:07] pete: tha'ts odd - the link should take you straight to the beginning of the panel [14:07] Hmm, I'm probably from a different feed [14:07] can you tell me which link you used? [14:07] so I can fix it? [14:08] * urgen is on ICANN primary [14:08] I thought I was on the secondary, but it's just saying name not a URL - maybe I'll exit and start over on that [14:10] Connected to primary... [14:10] mount cactus:/export/home /mnt [14:11] whups. Sorry. That'll teach me to work and chat at the saem time. :) [14:11] comments about mounting a cactus will be ignored [14:12] *** nancy has quit IRC (QUIT: ) [14:14] let's avoid the cactus mounting. a prickly subject. [14:14] badabing [14:14] heh. [14:14] Good thing I wasn't working on pug, dingo, or schnauzer at the time. :) [14:18] Meeting's starting back up. [14:18] here we go again [14:20] *** clintmole has joined #ICANN-LA [14:22] *** clintmole has quit IRC (QUIT: ) [14:23] I submitted a question. [14:24] wonder if they'll listen to the online questions this time [14:24] yes!!! yay!!! [14:24] mikki: They just did. [14:24] :) [14:26] I guess this means that it's going to be essentially a mailing list, and GA directors will still be chosen by the names council [14:26] Yep. I wanted to get someone to say that "officially". [14:27] Erick, si no recibes una respuesta, pedire a Mike Palage que se comunique contigo cuanto antes. [14:27] hola dennis [14:27] pues gracias.. [14:27] por la ayuda,.. porque al parecer se "soplaron la respuesta"Q [14:27] sorry por write in my mother language [14:28] i say why don't answer my question :) [14:28] there....I sent a comment [14:28] *** mikki is now known as MBarry [14:28] that might be easier to read as me :-) [14:29] Go Karl go! [14:29] Good one,Mikki! [14:29] No more additional structures!!!!! this is nuts! We already are structured out our ears!!! [14:29] good one what? what'd they do? [14:29] am I lagged? [14:29] *** VictorMotta has quit IRC (Connection reset by peer) [14:29] Mikki: nah. Dennis was just complimenting you on your comment. [14:30] oh...he read it on the list eh? cool :-) thanks Dennis. [14:30] I'm on migraine meds today so I'm not completely here [14:30] *** PatrickGreenwell has joined #ICANN-LA [14:30] Hey Mik (I'm 2 steps behind ... as usual! [14:30] *** GermanPerez has quit IRC (Connection reset by peer) [14:30] *** MBarry is now known as MikkiBarry [14:30] Karl's right on the money. [14:30] I submitted comments a few minutes ago on the comments page, yet there are not appearing. [14:30] It'll be interesting to hear the response. [14:32] who is this person? [14:32] hah... net congestion so I get to miss the response [14:32] she's asking for the GA to come to a proposal for a way to nominate a chair to be elected by the NC [14:33] The NC should not be electing the chair. Period. [14:33] Why aren't comments appearing is what I would like to know... [14:33] Who's speaking now? [14:33] *** holobyte has quit IRC (QUIT: BitchX-1.0c10 -- just do it.) [14:33] Ah. ok. [14:33] Switched to secondary feed... [14:34] *** MichaelFroomkin has joined #ICANN-LA [14:34] Professor. Hi [14:34] Hello [14:34] *** PatrickGreenwell has quit IRC (Connection reset by peer) [14:34] Comments are appearing on the viewable page in my browser... [14:34] oh, here comes the "people are stupid and the names council is smart and is more thoughtful than the GA" [14:34] though there's a line at the mic [14:35] On Sunday, Theresa Amato and Stephen Hilll invoked the electoral college analogy. [14:35] They're not going to swallow my current comment easily. [14:35] Is this a respresentative body, or a consensus body... jeesh [14:35] also, using the comment sub form [14:35] for quickie comments rather than questions [14:35] might not be wise [14:35] it clogs the system [14:36] and makes it harder for us to get the comments to the board [14:36] so if you just want to say "I agree" [14:36] please use the chat window [14:36] which is also archived [14:36] John, I understand, but we are once again not getting any feedback from the floor. [14:36] this is what happened in the last meeting. The online comments were largely ignored [14:36] Sounds like it's becoming a top-down [14:37] It is utterly frustrating for those of us who have been told that our participation is useful [14:37] If the comments list is used to determine consensus, then perhaps we need to be using the comment sub form? [14:37] mikki - nearly every comment before the break was included [14:37] [14:37] please don't make blanket statements like that [14:38] without checking the archive [14:38] of the chat [14:38] I'm just very frustrated with all of this, John. I know that you are likely doing your best [14:38] *** root has joined #ICANN-LA [14:38]